WND EXCLUSIVE

Obama admin's 'loose lips' under investigation

Grand jury to review use of classified information for political gain

Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. He is also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially.

Members of a “citizens’ grand jury” will meet next week in Ocala, Fla., to look at allegations that the “loose lips” of the Obama administration led to the deaths of dozens of members of the U.S. military and the imprisonment of a Pakistan physician who helped locate Osama bin Laden – all to “bolster” the “political agendas” of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden.

A proposed indictment prepared by attorney Larry Klayman, a former Justice Department prosecutor, alleges actions by the current White House – such as Biden’s decision to reveal the identity of the military team whose members ultimately eliminated bin Laden – violated the best interests and security of the nation.

It quotes Kurt Tidd, vice admiral in the U.S. Navy, who said in a sworn Freedom of Information Act statement denying access to military information, “Although it is known that [Department of Defense] conducts military and intelligence operations in foreign nations, publicly disclosing a particular military or intelligence activity could cause the foreign government to respond in ways that would damage U.S. national interests.”

Klayman pointed out to WND that by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the grand jury is not a branch of the judicial, executive or legislative branches of government, but an entity to itself.

“Loose lips” is part of the World War II advisory to Americans that “loose lips sink ships,” a warning against releasing any information that could be used against the U.S. by its enemies under any circumstances.

According to the 1990s ruling in U.S. v. Williams, the Supreme Court determined the federal courts lack the authority to require a prosecutor to present specific information to a grand jury.

The opinion rejected the argument that the concept of “checks and balances” allows a court to “exercise supervisory power over grand jury proceedings.” Therefore, Klayman told WND, it is the ideal vehicle to bypass all of the political attachments of the judiciary and cut to the chase in evaluating a president’s actions.

“Justice Antonin Scalia held … that the grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing and in the manner in which that power is exercised. Unlike [a] court, whose jurisdiction is predicated upon a specific case or controversy, the grand jury can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not,” he wrote.

In the same commentary, Klayman explained, the Founders of the country established the grand jury as an alternative to “violent revolution.”

It is a process by which “Americans themselves can enforce the law. This is our only recourse to hold the president and his accomplices truly accountable for their actions.”

On a website set up in support of the citizens’ grand jury, he writes, “With government corruption and treasonous acts running rampant, particularly with regard to President Obama and his administration, many have asked what ordinary American citizens can do to legally mete out justice. … There is only one strong legal mechanism that can be invoked. That is the so-called ‘citizens grand jury.'”

Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch and later, FreedomWatch, has throughout his career identified and prosecuted government corruption, taking on powerful politicians on both sides of the aisle, up to and including Bill Clinton.

Klayman said there will be evidence, expert witnesses and other information provided under the authority of the 5th Amendment. Obama and Biden will have to appear, he added, or be evaluated while absent.

“Ocala in 2012 will become the Philadelphia of 1776,” he said.

The proposed indictment, which would be final only after review by the citizens grand jury, includes allegations that were spurred by the U.S. military raid in Pakistan that killed bin Laden.

While the Navy SEALS were successful, their identities were revealed only when Biden “was at a dinner at Washington’s Ritz Carlton Hotel and he said, ‘Let me briefly acknowledge tonight’s distinguished honorees. Admiral James Stavridis is a, is the real deal. He can tell you more about and understands the incredible, the phenomenal, the just almost unbelievable capacity of his Navy SEALs and what they did last Sunday… Folks, I’d be remiss also if I didn’t say an extra word about the incredible events, extraordinary events of this past Sunday. As vice president of the United States, as an American, I was in absolute awe of the capacity and dedication of the entire team, both the intelligence community, the CIA, the SEALs. It just was extraordinary.'”

Weeks later, insurgents in Afghanistan shot down a U.S. military helicopter, killing 30 Americans, “most of them belonging to the same elite Navy SEALS unit that killed Osama bin Laden,” the proposed indictment alleges.

Also, “As a direct result of this leak, Shakil Alfridi, a Pakistani doctor who aided the Central Intelligence Agency in tracking down Osama bin Laden, was arrested and sentenced to 33 years in jail when the Pakistani authorities discovered Afridi’s involvement with the CIA after an internal government probe.

“These leaks on national security coming from the White House undermine the men and women who put risks on their lives for us. This is not helpful. I suppose it could have served some short-term political gain, could have … told some nice story,” said U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., now the GOP nominee for vice president.

“But let’s ask this question: If you’re a doctor in Pakistan and the American government asks you to help in the future and you see that, what do you think you’re going to do? How are we going to get people to help us in the war on terror if this is how we treat our allies in the war on terror?”

The White House decision to grant Hollywood access to the raid details – for the purpose of movie that apparently will portray Obama and the hero – also was raised as an issue.

“Days after the raid, Hollywood was invited into the White House so that they could receive a briefing on exactly how the raid took place,” said Fred Rustman, a retired CIA officer, “What kind of sources we had. What kind of methods we used. All for the purpose of making a Hollywood movie.”

On another subject, there are allegations that Obama “ordered the release of classified intelligence assessments and documents that detail Israel’s most sensitive military zones. Released were staging grounds (air base) and logistics in Azerbaijan where Israel Defense could easily strike Iran. Israel, a United States ally, had a secret relationship with Azerbaijan or at least, it had. Azerbaijan had granted Israel access to airbases in its territory along Iran’s northern border for potential use in a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, a report published Wednesday in Foreign Policy magazine quoted senior U.S. officials as saying. ‘The Israelis have bought an airfield,’ an official said, ‘and the airfield is called Azerbaijan.’ … The Foreign Policy report by journalist Mark Perry, said the Obama administration believes the Jerusalem-Baku relationship is raising the risk of an Israeli strike on Iran. Senior U.S. officials have said that Israel’s military expansion into Azerbaijan is complicating U.S. efforts to defuse Israeli-Iranian tensions. ‘We’re watching what Israel is doing in Azerbaijan. And we’re not happy about it,’ one official said,” according to Klayman’s presentation.

Other questions have been raised on Obama’s orders regarding cyberwar, Obama’s secret kill list, and other issues.

“Information leaked was done so intentionally and wantonly without regard to, or concern for, the national security of the United States and whose only purpose was to bolster and promote Defendant Obama’s and Defendant Biden’s political agendas,” Klayman’s presentation explains.

Expected to be offered as evidence, too, are the testimonies of a number of people who have spoken out on the issue. See their statements: